[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahVsa0jAdy0[/youtube]
Case in point, all the laws, courts, categorizations, and books or koans on morality is merely a giant circle jerking grand delusion of individuals chasing windmills in the Don Quixote sense. Chasing nonexistent fictional phantoms.
The underlings of any given power structure don’t really question it for it is the social metanarrative they’ve been taught, conditioned, or engineered to believe in. The domesticated societies they’ve grown up in couldn’t exist without this grand delusion as without it would rip it apart and so like a majority of collective psychological herd mentality of most human beings it just becomes easier to go along with things even if it is all ridiculous, absurd, or unfounded.
Everybody else is going along with it so I better also which is indicative of the herd mentality typically.
Individuals at the very top who tend to be the smartest of societies know inherently well all of morality or ethics is bullshit. They ought to know for they are the ones who have been authoring laws into existence for the last 2600 years however it is a useful fiction to pedal to the masses in that power cannot easily be rationalized or logically explained by any conventional methods. Power is primal. Power cannot be rationalized or logically deduced. A usefull fiction is needed to herd, control, enslave, and dominate the masses under the top tier of individuals within civilization and this is why morality or ethics were devised as a purely human fictional construct to do just that.
Picture an individual beyond the useful fiction of morality trying to rationalize and logically deduce as to why another human being needs to be enslaved or controlled. It just wouldn’t work. If on the other hand you devise that their enslavement and life being controlled is good under some fictional abstraction of the greater good then it becomes available where individuals will literally line up for their own slavery especially out of fear of fanatic violent reprisal.
Morality is a useful fiction that pervades itself as being objective, scientific, universal, and equal.
Morality is also a monopoly in that it orchestrates the facility of concentrating power within a few individuals.
Ahh… I made such a teenie post and you never responded to it… Instead you spammed a whole page… Phonetic ethics does that too…
Is your argument good or not 
Simple question.
You can fuck off now. Thanks in advance.
If you don’t answer the question, considering this is your whole output, then by omission you are admitting that you’re a troll.
Is your argument good or not ???
Not often you can actually catch a troll!!!
Every time you post or make comments on my threads it looks a lot like this…
Incoherent bullshit, incoherent bullshit, incoherent bullshit, incoherent bullshit, incoherent bullshit, incoherent bullshit…
Do you see a pattern emerging Ecmandu?
That’s the only move you have, well played…
Uccisore likes that one too…
Let’s be a little more clear…
“Morality is bullshit” - hahaha
Is it good to post that? Is it correct? Is the correct the good?
Call me what you want, but this Board has objective moralists for that reason… They believe what they’re posting is right!!!
The question is, are you a troll??
Since you’ve used the “ecmandu never makes sense” defense, how about others weigh in, then you can retroactively state that they are incoherent too, and it was only an illusion that you were responding to them in context!!!
This is actually worthy of your name…
It’s hilarious!!!
I’m not against this thread and I specifically added to it, in addition to taking a couple of snipes at it. It’s a good dark mirror to Iamb’s threads and it is something that needs to be dealt with and faced. It’s the underbelly, where lost denied stuff is churning underneath all the BS is society.
I am assuming you don’t mean the one in journalism, so probably not.
NO, that would either be a value judgment or a nutritional one. But when complaining about humans, in the context you were, it comes off as a specific kind of value judgment, a moral one.
Then don’t. People have their self-myths and these are usually tied into their ideas, though their self-myths may not fit with their ideas. Your are taking on a specific role in this thread and I partly don’t buy it. That’s relevent. As I said very clearly, I could be wrong about that one. Perhaps you are a nihilist, rather than someone in the underbelly of society who hates society for being bad/evil and likes the role of shoving back in the face of society what it does not want to look at. I won’t bother with this issue again. But it is not disprespect or disrailing to simply take people as what they claim to be. To accept what they say are their motivations and beliefs are. You should know this more than most people. Am I supposed to disbelieve nearly everyone - that is what is thread is about - but just take your self-presentation at face value?
Nope, I’m not. What Manson brings to this thread is his insight into the hypocrisy of society IN THE WAY IT USED HIM as an idea. He would point out the average citizen’s proxy involvement in Vietnam, where atrocities were daily fare, while at the same time demonzing him. That society was using him as part of a self-myth. We are the civilized people, we are the good moral people and Charile, over there, not us, that is what a bad person is like. Manson grew up incarcerated and in part of the shitty underbelly of society. He mingled, his whole life, with people who were treated like shit by their families and authorities. You know, sexually abused kids, drug addicts, outcasts, small time criminals. Part of the shadow of the great wonderful society we supposedly lived in.
Yes, he is pretty simple. He’s no Nietsche, not even close. But he was able to bring himself into his communications, which had very similar themes to those in the rest of the thread, and point out how he was being used as a bogeyman and how this is in support of both individual self-myths - I am one of the good people - and society’s myths - our nation is great, though there are some bad apples like Manson. He also was willing to take on their projections and say if there was a problem with him, they should look at his parenting. by which he meant juvenile courts, foster homes, police, etc. ‘I am what you made’. I am you.
He’s more of a performance artist than a philosopher. But then perhaps you can relate even to that.
Not to say I think he’d be good company, he’d be worse company than most, as you might put it, but his communication has merit. Most of the people you quoted so far had comfy lives compared to him. They were looking through binoculars at the dark side of society and they had time to sit at their desks and hone their skills.
Cervantes, however, he went through some dark shit.
Great quote by one of my favorite historical characters. Not sure why you posted it though.
I see you’ve been busy lately in addressing me. Don’t worry, I haven’t forgotten you.
I’m just savoring my time so I can reply with stuff that is clever and witty in response.
I like the shadow of society and the people that live within it like myself. For me such individuals are the only real kind of human beings left not the ones that live in their ivory towers where life is constantly scripted or rehearsed for them.
For me those people are the ultimate actors and puppets. Still, I’m no Charles Manson and dislike your comparison of him to me.
In that assertion he was correct. I would say the same.
I’m the very kind of creature civilization has fashioned. It could deny this all it wants but it is a truism nonetheless.
I’m just a philosopher from the shadows of civilization’s underbelly. A kind of one who has a thing for theatrics.
Is that really so terrible?
Yes, a tragedy of a great writer although I find the best forms of writing are motivated by tragedy, despair, or angst.
I of course welcome you to the thread then because I always like a good challenge to my beliefs.
As for the inverted pyramid comment let’s just say I like taking morality and ethics flipping them upside down digging through to the real motivations behind things cutting around the whole propaganda presented appearances of things.
I always find myself most successful with this. It’s actually quite easy to do.
I am not saying you guys are the same, remotely. I see some similarities some major differences. But he fits in the thread.
For example.
Nope.
Good. AFter I posted it I thought he’ll think I was critizing him, which I wasn’t. But here you are simply not sure, and I wrong in my expectation. I posted because, drum roll, it fits the thread.
Fair enough. See Moreno, we can agree on things from time to time. I am not an unreasonable man.
I was hoping to find some quotes on becoming animal, deterritorialization, rhizomes and the like, since this is anarchy/nihilism at a fundamental level. Though he’s a vitalist nihilist. But I could not find anything both short and clear. He considered the self a fascist myth, something in the way, and internal civilization trying to discipline a multitude he wanted to set free.
Yes, it does. Nice call. Don’t mind me, I am always suspicious of ulterior motives naturally.
So, getting a feel of the shadow of civilization’s underbelly, what are you thoughts or projections?
Tell me, what are your real feelings on the subject?
Gilles Delueze is an interesting writer. Might surprise you that I like his writings also.
Those are the quotes and thoughts of a writer however, what are your own thoughts on the subject?
Why do you think there is so much instability and human suffering? What is the primary cause?